Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ZOOKEEPER-4546: Backport auto reloading client key/trust store to 3.8 #1885

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: branch-3.8
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

li4wang
Copy link
Contributor

@li4wang li4wang commented May 24, 2022

This is cherry-pick from #1839. This PR is the same as the #1839 on the master branch, only changing the documentation about the version numbers.

Signed-off-by: Li Wang li4wang@gmail.com

@li4wang
Copy link
Contributor Author

li4wang commented May 24, 2022

@eolivelli @symat would you mind taking a look at this backporting PR for 3.8? Thanks.

@li4wang li4wang changed the title ZOOKEEPER-4546 Backport auto reloading client key/trust store to 3.8 ZOOKEEPER-4546: Backport auto reloading client key/trust store to 3.8 May 24, 2022
@symat
Copy link
Contributor

symat commented May 24, 2022

Looks OK, waiting for CI to finish

This is cherry-pick from apache#1839. This PR is the same as the apache#1839 on the master branch, only changing the documentation about the version numbers.

Signed-off-by: Li Wang <li4wang@gmail.com>

ZOOKEEPER-4546 Backport auto reloading client key/trust store to 3.8

This is cherry-pick from apache#1839. This PR is the same as the apache#1839 on the master branch, only changing the documentation about the version numbers.

Signed-off-by: Li Wang <li4wang@gmail.com>
@li4wang
Copy link
Contributor Author

li4wang commented May 31, 2022

@symat can you help getting the workflow approved when you get a chance? Thanks.

@tlwr
Copy link

tlwr commented May 2, 2024

Any news on this PR? We are hesitant to upgrade to 3.9 as it is not yet LTS, but would love this feature in 3.8

(or if 3.9 is going to be LTS soon then this can probably be closed?)

Many thanks, both!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants